Estes v. Commonwealth

In Estes v. Commonwealth, 212 Va. 23, 181 S.E.2d 622 (1971), the Court, in adopting the analysis used for a similar provision in the predecessor to Code 19.2-294, said that "one occasion of driving an automobile may give rise to several acts and offenses and that the test of whether there are separate acts sustaining several offenses 'is whether the same evidence is required to sustain them.'" 212 Va. at 24, 181 S.E.2d at 623-24. Applying that test, the Court went on to hold that, for purposes of the Habitual Offender Act, defendant's convictions for driving under the influence and driving under a suspended license, although resulting from offenses that were committed at the same time, "arose 'out of separate acts'--one out of the act of driving under the influence and the other out of the act of driving on a suspended license." 212 Va. at 24-25, 181 S.E.2d at 624. "Therefore," the Supreme Court concluded, "the convictions must be counted individually as second and third convictions, thereby constituting the defendant an habitual offender." 212 Va. at 25, 181 S.E.2d at 624.